This invention relates to safes in general, and more particularly to improvements in safes or repositories for temporary or permanent storage of valuables, e.g., paper money. Still more particularly, the invention relates to improvements in repositories or safes of the type wherein compartments, e.g., drawers, for storage of notes or bills of various denominations, jewels, watches, travellers' checks and/or securities can be exposed or concealed so as to be accessible for insertion or authorized removal of valuables but are protected against unauthorized removal.
The terms "repository" and "safe" are intended to denote portable or permanently installed strong boxes for valuables, including boxes for paper money of various denominations which are utilized in banks and related institutions wherein cashiers, tellers or other agents accept valuables from customers or employees and/or hand out valuables in payment for goods or services or in exchange for checks or bills. Institutions most likely to utilize the improved repository or safe are banks, currency exchanges, lending institutions and similar establishments which are visited by members of the general public.
The number of robberies of banks and other money collecting, paying or lending agencies, jewelry stores, department stores and other establishments which receive and pay out large amounts of money is on the increase. Therefore, such establishments are compelled to undertake extensive precautionary measures, not only to prevent robberies and/or to reduce the sums of money or other valuables which can be appropriated by criminals in the course of a robbery, but also (and normally even more) to protect the employees and/or members of the public from bodily harm or mental anguish in the course and/or as a consequence of a holdup. It is not sufficient merely to insure that the valuables which are manipulated by an agent, e.g., a teller in a bank, who handles large sums of money or other negotiables are adequately protected by being kept out of reach of unauthorized persons (for example, by confining the agent in a bulletproof and hermetically sealed cage). The laws of many countries already provide that the cages for tellers in banks and like institutions must be bulletproof and should not be accessible when the institution is open to the public. However, a robber is likely to threaten one or more customers and/or employees with bodily harm and thus compel a teller to hand over large amounts of valuables in exchange for release of the hostages. Therefore, the perpetrators often get away with large hauls in spite of the fact that they are prevented from gaining direct access to the safe or safes.
It was already proposed to thwart attempts to rob a bank or a similar institution by insuring that the robber or would-be robber is aware of inability of the agent in charge to hand over substantial sums of money or other valuables. To this end, the valuables are confined in strongly reinforced boxes or safes which can be opened only with a predetermined delay. Thus, a bank teller is unable to hand over a large sum of money, even if he or she is willing to satisfy the demands of a robber, because a signal to open the safe is followed by a preselected interval which must elapse before the contents of the safe become accessible to anyone including the agent in charge. A would-be robber who is aware of such design of the safe is likely to desist from a holdup because, as a rule, a holdup is carried out within a matter of a few minutes. The likelihood of apprehension, either by a police patrol which happens to pass by, by several bank guards or even by aroused employees and/or customers increases from second to second so that a criminal or would-be criminal who enters a bank with the intent of staging a robbery is likely to leave and seek an easier target if such person notes that the agent in charge is incapable of handing over a substantial amount of valuables, even if one or more hostages are threatened with bodily harm. Threats to hostages are to no avail since the criminal must await the elapse of a preselected interval of time regardless of whether or not the agent in charge and/or other employees or customers are held hostage.
The just discussed proposal exhibits the drawback that, in order to insure adequate security, the safe must be constructed and assembled in such a way that its manipulation interferes with normal work of the agent in charge, i.e., the agent must permit a relatively long interval of time to elapse even at a time when no holdup is in progress and no holdup is likely to occur.